• One main difference not discussed ... - KIS 07:05:51 03/29/08 (5)
  In Reply to: RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps posted by Duilawyer on March 27, 2008 at 20:28:11

  Is that Class D amps do not need any negative feedback to work properly whereas all Solid State Amps need anything from 20 to 40 dB.
  
  This brings us back to SS vs tube discussion. Tube needs less negative feedback than SS in general and therefore it sounds more natural and open. Some tube amps can also achieve zero neg feedback but the problem with them are that they are bandwidth limited and they can not drive low impedance speakers.
  
  The thing with neg feedback is exactly what was described about the ability to hear more and the "no more haze" clarity.
  
  I have heard a Class D amp recently (can't remember the name) compared to a SET amp. The Class D amp sounded very clean and fast with good bass and highs, but like someone mentioned before, the tone and reverb are not as good as a good tube amp with no neg feedback. Also the Class D amp is too dry for my liking. But I am sure that the future improvement on Class D amps is enormous as the main benefit is their ability of amplifying with any neg feedback.
  
  Negative feedback ruins the sound of most amps. How can adding old signal to new signal be any good? It is the major cause of haze.
  
  
  
  

  ---

  • RE: One main difference not discussed ... - morricab 05:12:31 03/30/08 (4)
    In Reply to: RE: One main difference not discussed ... posted by KIS on March 29, 2008 at 07:05:51

    "Is that Class D amps do not need any negative feedback to work properly whereas all Solid State Amps need anything from 20 to 40 dB"
    
    Ummm, yes they do.
    
    "but the problem with them are that they are bandwidth limited and they can not drive low impedance speakers."
    
    Ummm, some of them are not bandwidth limited and some can drive low impedance speakers (not that Maggies are particularly difficult loads).
    
    "Negative feedback ruins the sound of most amps. How can adding old signal to new signal be any good? It is the major cause of haze."
    
    I agree with you completely.
    
    

    ---

    • RE: One main difference not discussed ... - KIS 16:13:06 03/30/08 (3)
      In Reply to: RE: One main difference not discussed ... posted by morricab on March 30, 2008 at 05:12:31

      "Is that Class D amps do not need any negative feedback to work properly whereas all Solid State Amps need anything from 20 to 40 dB"
      
      Ummm, yes they do.
      
      The Class D amp I heard was zero neg feedback.
      
      "but the problem with them are that they are bandwidth limited and they can not drive low impedance speakers."
      
      Ummm, some of them are not bandwidth limited and some can drive low impedance speakers (not that Maggies are particularly difficult loads).
      
      Show me some tube amps with zero neg feedback that thrives on 1 and 2 Ohm loads. Quad 57s and Sound Lab speakers.
      
      
      

      ---

      • RE: One main difference not discussed ... - morricab 04:13:31 03/31/08 (2)
        In Reply to: RE: One main difference not discussed ... posted by KIS on March 30, 2008 at 16:13:06

        "The Class D amp I heard was zero neg feedback."
        
        Which one was that?
        
        "Show me some tube amps with zero neg feedback that thrives on 1 and 2 Ohm loads. Quad 57s and Sound Lab speakers"
        
        Thrives? Well that is a strong word. Adequately drives this I can show you.
        
        I use Acoustat Spectra 2200 and 4400. These drop to 2 ohms in the bass and below 2 ohms in the highs. My KR Audio VA350i drives them just fine with tight controlled bass and clear open highs. No problems. Quad 57s would also be NO problem (in fact the original Quad amp was tube, low powered and designed to drive Quad 57s). About Soundlabs I am not sure but my experience so far suggests that in a moderate sized room it would work.
        
        

        ---

        • RE: One main difference not discussed ... - KIS 06:21:21 03/31/08 (1)
          In Reply to: RE: One main difference not discussed ... posted by morricab on March 31, 2008 at 04:13:31

          "original Quad amp was tube, low powered and designed to drive Quad 57s"
          
          Remember we are talking about zero neg feedback, The Quad II if I am not wrong has about 12 or 18 dB of Global feedback.
          
          I used the Spectra 2200 before and it is an much easier load.
          
          Is your KR amps zero Nrg Feedback?
          
          The best zero feedback amp I have heard is the Hurricanes driving the 57.
          
          

          ---

          • RE: One main difference not discussed ... - morricab 02:51:34 04/01/08 (0)
            In Reply to: RE: One main difference not discussed ... posted by KIS on March 31, 2008 at 06:21:21

            "Is your KR amps zero Nrg Feedback"
            
            Yes it is. Remember though the Spetra 2200 drops to 2 ohms in both the bass and highs.
            
            "The best zero feedback amp I have heard is the Hurricanes driving the 57"
            
            I am sure that sounds really good.
            
            

            ---
• RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps - muralman1 16:02:04 03/28/08 (2)
  In Reply to: RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps posted by Duilawyer on March 27, 2008 at 20:28:11

  I am a little confused about just what amp you are talking about. Could you also tell us what your source, and wires are? I have found these elements to be utterly crucial for great sound bottom to top.
  
  

  ---

  • I have A Spectron Musician II - Duilawyer 22:07:24 03/29/08 (1)
    In Reply to: RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps posted by muralman1 on March 28, 2008 at 16:02:04

    that was fully upgraded to III. Speaker wires are Kimber 8TC.
    That runs the top portion of MG20s. I have (had) a BK REF 4420 to power the bottom panels. That was sold on the Audio gone and now I have 2 250 wpc B&O ICE Amps on the way DHL.
    
    btw, I am about to ship it back to Spectron to upgraded to Signature Edition For no reason other than, if this sounds so good, what could that sound like??? Same reason I bought MG20s sight unheard.
    
    

    ---

    • RE: I have A Spectron Musician II - muralman1 10:45:18 03/30/08 (0)
      In Reply to: RE: I have A Spectron Musician II posted by Duilawyer on March 29, 2008 at 22:07:24

      Thanks, Duilawyer. I think you will find more clarity if you switch the Kimbers for Anti-Cables. This is not what I use, but I have mono class D amps, and can run much shorter SCs. My digital source is a non-oversampler. I have found on a multitude of comparisons this is the only digital type that can give it all.
      
      
      
      

      ---
• Good post. A similar experience/confession... - Enophile 11:19:09 03/28/08 (10)
  In Reply to: RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps posted by Duilawyer on March 27, 2008 at 20:28:11

  Hi, Duilawyer, neat to read about your adventures with the Maggies.
  
  I have had a similar experience with my Apogee Studio Grands this year.
  
  I kinda sorta decided to find some new thing to play with this past year, and grabbed a pair of Crown XLS 802's to hook up to those speakers. They were about 1100 bucks for both, rated at 500W/Ch into 8 ohms, and 800W/Ch into my four ohm speakers.
  
  Hooked 'em up and Blam! (Blam in a good way! ;))
  
  After I decided I liked 'em, the wiring to the internal fans was cut, and even when playing dynamic music for long periods, no heat build up.
  
  I'm still in the "different" vs. "better" phase of listening, but it is amazing how a component switch can seem to bring new insight into recordings. I feel like there is certainly ample detail still being retrieved, and am waiting for a longer audition time to see if these are as good as they seem to sound. People unaware that any switch was made or hadn't heard the system before are quite fond of the sound of the system, so it seems to be not just me who is liking them.
  
  (I find that in the "different" vs "better" thing, a nice long listening time answers the question: I will either stay entertained, or I will let my affection drift toward another love object. In this regard, Hi Fi can mimic life!)
  
  Anyway, the Guitar Center carries these, and there is an easy return policy. I'd be curious to see how the bass panels of the Maggies might like them.
  
  Best wishes.
  
  P.S. I also have a couple pairs of modded Acoustat 2+2's I like to play around with, and these Crowns really "owned" those speakers. Very dynamic.
  
  
  
  

  ---

  • RE: Good post. A similar experience/confession... - morricab 13:28:19 03/28/08 (9)
    In Reply to: RE: Good post. A similar experience/confession... posted by Enophile on March 28, 2008 at 11:19:09

    Hi Enophile,
    
    As a former Apogee owner and current Acoustat owner (1+1, Spectra 2200 and Spectra 4400) I too tried out Class D amplification. I owned a pair of Class D monoblocks from a small Swiss company and a PS Audio HCA-2, which even got tried out on a pair of Apogee Grands that a friend of mine in Germnay owns. I have also heard ICE based amps on Apogees as well as a couple of different brands of UcD based Class D amps. My first impression was of clarity and definition and great bass. Dig deeper and you realize that tone is seriously lacking in the mids and highs.
    
    The difference is that it is simply not grating in the same way that SS can be so in many ways it is more tolerable; however, it is still far to dry from what I know to be correct. This can be clearly heard with acoustic instrument recordings, such as good classical recordings. In a way this harmonically "stripped" (for lack of a better word) sound is what people want because it does allow for instruments not to step all over each other and thus creates a well ordered but quite flat soundstage.
    
    It has been my experience that amplifiers and/or source components that have issues in the highs often have difficulty accurately portraying soundstage depth. It is almost always somewhat foreshortened compared to a component that truly reproduces the highs accurately. Some have been so bad as to render the soundstage completely flat!
    
    For me, I am not willing to make a tradeoff in instrument tone to gain a smidgen more "clarity". I have managed to find other amps that will give natural tone and yet maintain the same transparency, dynamics and soundstaging of Class D.
    
    I will be curious as to your conclusions when you finally decide whether for you it is really better or not rather than merely different.
    
    

    ---

    • You know Flo? - Enophile 17:37:01 03/28/08 (4)
      In Reply to: RE: Good post. A similar experience/confession... posted by morricab on March 28, 2008 at 13:28:19

      Hi, Morricab!
      
      Were the Grands Florian's?
      
      What a toy those would be. I tried to track down a pair in L.A. but lost the scent.
      
      This class of amp is intruiging, for sure.
      
      I've enjoyed listening to the Channel Islands Audio D-200 monoblocks driving a pair of Von Schweikerts and was impressed, under show conditions. In fact, it was that experience that made me decide to give this class of amps a little more thought.
      
      I'm a fan of a more "laid back" image, and these Crowns definitely move the imaging forward, but still "behind" the plain of the speakers.
      
      It's too early to go overboard talking about their characteristics, but sometimes there is a feeling of almost "too much" information. On some older LP's, tape edits or splices suddenly become more noticeable than I have heard previously; which leads me to wonder if they are just that detailed or whether they are placing inappropriate emphasis on this aspect of the sonics. In the past, when I've run into a piece of gear that did something at a level that other gear did not, it was more than likely due to a flaw rather than a newly discovered vurtue, if that makes sense.
      
      As I get used to them, I think I will find a way to compare them to the Channel Islands amps and some current class-D amps and see if these different implementations make for significant differences.
      
      Anyway, thanks for the post, I look forward to future chats!
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      

      ---

      • RE: You know Flo? - saltyflies 07:49:38 03/29/08 (1)
        In Reply to: RE: You know Flo? posted by Enophile on March 28, 2008 at 17:37:01

        I’ve experienced that “too much" information conundrum as well. It seems to me that a system comprised soley of ubber neutral, articulate components, while capable of a mouse piss on a cotton ball level of detail – can be somewhat anti-septic or sterile sounding.
        
        One of the most articulate systems configs that I’ve heard was with Wilson speakers driven by Spectral electronics. I found it to be exceptionally clean, transparent, ubber detailed with lighting fast transients. Everything was presented in an very incisive, dead-on-balls neutral, ubber accurate fashion, but after the shock & awe effect passed, it felt somewhat lifeless or lacking emotion. Perhaps it’s me, but I don’t hear real sounds sliced and diced / harmonically blanched like that.
        
        
        Believe what your ears say - not hearsay.
        
        

        ---

        • RE: You know Flo? - morricab 05:08:05 03/30/08 (0)
          In Reply to: RE: You know Flo? posted by saltyflies on March 29, 2008 at 07:49:38

          "Perhaps it’s me, but I don’t hear real sounds sliced and diced / harmonically blanched like that."
          
          That's because they are not and if the stereo presents it this way it is wrong.
          
          

          ---
      • Did you see there is a show April 6? nt - Duilawyer 07:23:27 03/29/08 (0)
        In Reply to: RE: You know Flo? posted by Enophile on March 28, 2008 at 17:37:01

        .
        
        

        ---
      • RE: You know Flo? - morricab 03:03:53 03/29/08 (0)
        In Reply to: RE: You know Flo? posted by Enophile on March 28, 2008 at 17:37:01

        Yes I know Flo, he is a friend of mine and I have been to his place several times to hear Divas, Grands and my(formerly) Caliper Signatures, which he bought off of me. We tried the PS Audio also on his Grand panels... it was a no go from the beginning. Worked great on the sub part though. He is using a pair of Sphinx Project 14s now (one he got from me when I switched to KR Audio amplifiers), which give great sound with Apogees.
        
        
        "but sometimes there is a feeling of almost "too much" information"
        
        This is a bad sign, IMO. Real live music never feels like this and a truly good reproduction shouldn't either.
        
        "if they are just that detailed or whether they are placing inappropriate emphasis on this aspect of the sonics."
        
        Of course any exaggeration in this area would be related to high frequency response...an area Class D amps have well known weaknesses so I would vote for your latter feeling.
        
        "In the past, when I've run into a piece of gear that did something at a level that other gear did not, it was more than likely due to a flaw rather than a newly discovered vurtue, if that makes sense."
        
        It makes perfect sense, just remember different is not always better. It takes time to sort it out. You have one of the best loudspeakers ever made for sorting these things out you know. Very few speaker designs can compare with Apogee. Since the Studio Grands are one of the easiest Apogees (5 ohms even) to drive you really should try some good tubes on the panels. The unforced resolution will allow you to ease into the music without effort.
        
        Cheers
        
        
        
        

        ---
    • I found my first negative. Jackson Browne Live II - Duilawyer 14:21:03 03/28/08 (3)
      In Reply to: RE: Good post. A similar experience/confession... posted by morricab on March 28, 2008 at 13:28:19

      sounds sibilent. No other CD has; not Simon and Garfunkel or prefab Sprout, or Abraxas. So maybe its his voice.
      Maybe more burn in.
      But that sibilance is slicing like a dental drill.
      
      

      ---

      • RE: I found my first negative. Jackson Browne Live II - HiOnFi 05:09:51 03/30/08 (0)
        In Reply to: RE: I found my first negative. Jackson Browne Live II posted by Duilawyer on March 28, 2008 at 14:21:03

        I alos have JB II and living it. No sibilence here.
        
        

        ---
      • RE: I found my first negative. Jackson Browne Live II - morricab 14:57:21 03/28/08 (1)
        In Reply to: RE: I found my first negative. Jackson Browne Live II posted by Duilawyer on March 28, 2008 at 14:21:03

        Do you have any classical music? Try that and see what you think.
        
        

        ---

        • lots. will do. nt - Duilawyer 17:00:33 03/28/08 (0)
          In Reply to: RE: I found my first negative. Jackson Browne Live II posted by morricab on March 28, 2008 at 14:57:21

          .
          
          

          ---
• RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps - jjcarr 06:08:36 03/28/08 (1)
  In Reply to: RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps posted by Duilawyer on March 27, 2008 at 20:28:11

  Have you compared the ICE amp to the Spectron? I'm curious how they compare.
  
  

  ---

  • Next Friday, will compare.. nt - Duilawyer 12:58:07 03/28/08 (0)
    In Reply to: RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps posted by jjcarr on March 28, 2008 at 06:08:36

    .
    
    

    ---
• Finally - HiOnFi 04:50:17 03/28/08 (2)
  In Reply to: RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps posted by Duilawyer on March 27, 2008 at 20:28:11

  Amng the reasons for going ICE (I use both PS Audio and Wyred4Sound) is that you get a LOT MORE wattage for your dollar, AND they are 80%+ effcient which can be a tidy sum when driving inefficient speakers like the maggies
  
  

  ---

  • I agree 137%, and sometimes wonder if Maggies are NOT - Duilawyer 09:40:53 03/28/08 (1)
    In Reply to: RE: Finally posted by HiOnFi on March 28, 2008 at 04:50:17

    less efficient than claimed. Not trolling, but 89db? 85db.
    
    

    ---

    • RE: I agree 137%, and sometimes wonder if Maggies are NOT - HiOnFi 10:25:24 03/28/08 (0)
      In Reply to: RE: I agree 137%, and sometimes wonder if Maggies are NOT posted by Duilawyer on March 28, 2008 at 09:40:53

      Not the speakers, the amps. ICE amps are 80%+ efficient whereas conventional amps can be in the 20-30% range. Multiply that by say 1000 wpc+ combined (bi-r triamping) and you can watch the electric meter spin like a top when yu are cranking it
      
      

      ---
• RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps - Ozzy 02:51:18 03/28/08 (0)
  In Reply to: RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps posted by Duilawyer on March 27, 2008 at 20:28:11

  > ICE is to SS; what CD was to cassette. <
  
  
  My, my, my....what a difference a day makes.........
  
  
  
  Oz
  
  

  ---
• RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps - Dawnrazor 21:19:47 03/27/08 (22)
  In Reply to: RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps posted by Duilawyer on March 27, 2008 at 20:28:11

  ICE is to SS; what CD was to cassette.
  
  D, I don't think you can make that general conclusion. Personally I don't think you have tried any great solidstate offerings. Good sure, but none of the amps I saw you trying are what I would call great.
  
  Said another way, i think there are some solidstate offerings that can compete favorably with the ice amps. I just don't think they have graced your system.
  
  Anyhow, I am glad it is working for you.
  
  

  ---

  • I did read a Rogue MAgnum 120 review that said it had more clarity than the - Duilawyer 13:11:16 03/28/08 (6)
    In Reply to: RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps posted by Dawnrazor on March 27, 2008 at 21:19:47

    Spectron Musician. But my point is really sound quality vs. economics. Once the smoke clears, there will be ICE amps for $499 for 525 wpc. When a person can buy that, NO ONE will pay the extra $4500 for the McIntosh at 250 wpc, or the Rogue at $2500.00. The improvement is questionable, the cost prohibitive.
    Well, a few will, but not enough to sustain a manufacturer. Restated my Musician II turned into a III will sound exactly like the new ICE models, which will be 1/4 the price.
    
    
    
    

    ---

    • RE: I did read a Rogue MAgnum 120 review that said it had more clarity than the - HiOnFi 05:26:31 03/30/08 (0)
      In Reply to: RE: I did read a Rogue MAgnum 120 review that said it had more clarity than the posted by Duilawyer on March 28, 2008 at 13:11:16

      I got on the ICE bandwagon when PS Audio came out with their GC (Gain Cell) series a couple of years ago. I replaced a pair of Rogue M 150s, that everything done (NOS cryoed tubes/gold fuses, Stillpoint/Risers/ERAudio Harmonizer boards) short of internal modifications. And people looked at me funny. Why? Because they are well behind the knowledge/technology curve.
      
      Caveat Emptor! Not all ICE amps are created equal, and I am not talking cosmetics. The basic technol;ogy has been around long enough that knowledgeable designers are figuring out how to improve on the basic design. So choose wisely, Grasshopper! Some hi-end companies who had ridiculously overpriced conventional design amps are now charging ridiculous prices for their ICE amps.
      
      2 bargains (I am using both) are PS Audio, modified by either Underwood or Cullen Circuits, or get the new Cullen design Wyred4Sound amps, as I did about 5 months ago. HINT: Run ICE amps in a balanced system, and you will really know what they are capable of;))
      
      TIP I just got a bunch of Herbies Grunge Busterss and Isoballs/with cup and ut them under just about everything. Added some warmth that makes me think there was some high freq vibs interfering with the sound
      
      

      ---
    • RE: I did read a Rogue MAgnum 120 review that said it had more clarity than the - CSF 18:32:03 03/28/08 (2)
      In Reply to: RE: I did read a Rogue MAgnum 120 review that said it had more clarity than the posted by Duilawyer on March 28, 2008 at 13:11:16

      You seem to be assuming two things - firstly that everybody hears like you and will like what you like and therefore not want anything else. I think that's unlikely. (A questionable improvement to you is the difference between enjoying the music and not to somebody else.) Secondly I wouldn't assume that ICE or any other class D amp will always be cheap. Top companies will invest in top power supplies, nice casing, top quality knobs and binding posts etc, and the cost will still be up there for the top brands.
      
      Just my thoughts.
      
      Cheers,
      
      Craig.
      
      

      ---

      • If top companies charge higher prices while Best Buy sells the Murano for $499 - Duilawyer 07:26:45 03/29/08 (1)
        In Reply to: RE: I did read a Rogue MAgnum 120 review that said it had more clarity than the posted by CSF on March 28, 2008 at 18:32:03

        goodbye top companies. Not all, some will live off of name, but if there is no sonic difference, except those that could be claimed due to nicer casings and top quality power supplies, better buttons...
        
        
        SACD.
        
        

        ---

        • RE: If top companies charge higher prices while Best Buy sells the Murano for $499 - CSF 13:31:46 03/29/08 (0)
          In Reply to: RE: If top companies charge higher prices while Best Buy sells the Murano for $499 posted by Duilawyer on March 29, 2008 at 07:26:45

          Ok. Fair enough. I was under the impression that good power supplies actually made a difference which is why the same ICE modules sound quite different when implemented by different companies. I was also under the impression that good power supplies cost money. Obviously it makes no difference and any ICE based amp built by any chump would beat every SS or Tube amp regardless of price. I also thought some people appreciated good construction for longevity etc but perhaps that's wrong too. I've got a lot to learn.
          
          Craig.
          
          

          ---
    • RE: I did read a Rogue MAgnum 120 review that said it had more clarity than the - morricab 13:29:52 03/28/08 (1)
      In Reply to: RE: I did read a Rogue MAgnum 120 review that said it had more clarity than the posted by Duilawyer on March 28, 2008 at 13:11:16

      "But my point is really sound quality vs. economics. Once the smoke clears, there will be ICE amps for $499 for 525 wpc"
      
      Great! Bad sound for a bargain...gee can't imagine anyone wanting those Rogues now...
      
      

      ---

      • mp3. nt - Duilawyer 14:21:41 03/28/08 (0)
        In Reply to: RE: I did read a Rogue MAgnum 120 review that said it had more clarity than the posted by morricab on March 28, 2008 at 13:29:52

        .
        
        

        ---
  • pardon my ignorance - wazoo 05:30:42 03/28/08 (9)
    In Reply to: RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps posted by Dawnrazor on March 27, 2008 at 21:19:47

    What exactly is ICE (I know all about class D) and how is it not solid state? To say it differs from bipolar transistors in Darlington pairs is one thing, but to say it's not solid state is another. If it isn't solid state, what the hell is it?
    
    BTW I agree with your statement completely. I thought the whole ICE & class D thing was about efficiency which is the polar opposite from class A. I can appreciate that these technologies have progressed and fine amps are now being constructed around them, but that doesn't make the old tried and true amps suddenly obsolete (especially not due to the way they sound). If I were you, I don't think I'd have any desire to replace the Pass!
    

    
    "Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
    
    

    ---

    • RE: pardon my ignorance - muralman1 18:01:47 03/28/08 (0)
      In Reply to: RE: pardon my ignorance posted by wazoo on March 28, 2008 at 05:30:42

      My last solid state were Pass monos. I never miss them.
      
      

      ---
    • Bang & Olufsen ICEpower - Al Sekela 16:38:20 03/28/08 (5)
      In Reply to: RE: pardon my ignorance posted by wazoo on March 28, 2008 at 05:30:42

      'ICE' means 'Intelligence, Compactness & Efficiency' and the output transistors are used as switches instead of linear amplifiers. Indeed, the high conversion efficiency of the technology is the main advantage discussed in the company literature. Whether ICEpower or switching amps in general can produce better sound than linear transistor amps is still open for debate. I've heard very good sound from both technologies, and in both cases the RF noise environments limit the ultimate sonic performance, rather than the amplifiers themselves.
      
      Keep in mind that all amplifier techniques have drawbacks. Linear transistor amps suffer from internal modulation of the transistor capacitances by the signal. This means the bandwidth of a linear amplifier stage varies with the signal voltage. High bias reduces the magnitude of this effect by lowering the resistance in series with the varying capacitances. While the stage performance is improved by increasing the bias, the standby heat dissipation and power supply requirements are made more severe. Heat sinks are acoustically resonant and applying acoustic damping to them reduces their efficiency. Operating high-power linear amps in a typical listening room in the summer requires noisy air-conditioning (unless you have a specialized HVAC installation that would cost as much as a typical house).
      
      Tube amps suffer from tube microphonics, which limit the resolution. Some tubes do this in a pleasing way, so they have their fans. The second-harmonic distortion argument is a red herring.
      
      The chief performance limitation of a switching amp is the dark time required between the two switches' on periods. This can be expected to be reduced as the performance of the control circuitry is improved. As long as Moore's Law is in effect we can expect integrated circuit performance to improve, so I expect switching amps to eventually replace linear amps altogether.
      

      • ICEpower company history   (Open in New Window)

      
      

      ---

      • thanks Al - nice reply - wazoo 17:44:22 03/28/08 (1)
        In Reply to: RE: Bang & Olufsen ICEpower posted by Al Sekela on March 28, 2008 at 16:38:20

        The total of my experience with amplifiers designed to be efficient is with a (class D) Soundcrafstman in '79 (to which my only response to the sales guy was, "Are you kidding me?") and then I purchased a little Carver M400t (with a C-1 pre) in '82. The Carver was interesting until I noticed a little motorboating; after I noticed it, I couldn't *stop* noticing it. I borrowed a friend's and it did the same thing. I bought a Yamaha C80/M80 shortly thereafter and was happy again. You could literally fry an egg on that thing - hell, you could cook the bacon too! That amp was pure class A for roughly the first 30 watts (if memory serves) and it sounded very sweet to my ears (especially after what it replaced). I decided then that I liked the energy wasters.
        
        I'd like to hear a modern high efficiency amp as there are certainly some advantages to the design philosophy. I brought up the Soundcraftsman because there was buzz in its time that class D would soon take over the audio world - nearly 30 years later it still hasn't. The transistor still hasn't wrought the extinction of the tube. Switching amps may replace linear amps in the mainstream, but I bet they won't drive them completely out of existence.
        

        
        "Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
        
        

        ---

        • Thirty years is a long time. - Al Sekela 14:21:25 03/29/08 (0)
          In Reply to: RE: thanks Al - nice reply posted by wazoo on March 28, 2008 at 17:44:22

          Remember when personal computers were toys and the Cray supercomputer was the thing? Who would have predicted the tremendous advances in integrated circuit technology? Well, a few folks like Richard Feynman, but they all got the details wrong.
          
          I've heard the Oasis linear solid-state amps (the Forsell design as manufactured in China) in a good friend's system, and his sound as well as mine are limited mostly by the RF noise environments in our houses. When we stop reducing our RF noise, it may turn out that his sound will be better than mine. That won't mean the amps are better, just that his amps in his RF environment work better than my amps in my environment. He's got the heat problem and I don't.
          
          

          ---
      • I had "assumed" that ICE would stand for something exotic. "Internal - Duilawyer 17:07:14 03/28/08 (2)
        In Reply to: RE: Bang & Olufsen ICEpower posted by Al Sekela on March 28, 2008 at 16:38:20

        Circuity Extension" .etc. Since it doesn't, does that mean that it is basically just a name to add to class D amplifier?. That its just a brand name for BO's particular processor?
        
        And maybe more important, I believe you have MG20s? Have you listened to a class D with them. I take back that they have no faults, I have heard a shrill note, but due to clarity and power, they are still rating 90-95%; not 100%. What says you?
        
        

        ---

        • I use the Gilmore Raptor monoblock switching amps. - Al Sekela 14:11:36 03/29/08 (0)
          In Reply to: RE: I had "assumed" that ICE would stand for something exotic. "Internal posted by Duilawyer on March 28, 2008 at 17:07:14

          These have massive linear power supplies instead of switching power supplies, and are better than my system is able to reveal. I use them with what remains of the external Magnepan crossovers (heavily modified) and my replacements for the internal crossovers, with my MG-20s.
          
          Switching amps create RF noise by virtue of their switching action. The output filter is intended to suppress the switching tone and its harmonics. The Gilmore amps have some sophistication in their output filters to improve the suppression. I don't know if your Spectron amps include this technique.
          
          Switching power supplies also create RF noise. Putting a switching power supply next to the amplifier creates a major problem for keeping the power supply noise out of the analog circuitry.
          
          My only modification of the Gilmore amps has been to take off their rubber feet and mount them directly on Deflex rubber sheets on end-grain butcher-block boards. These boards ride on home-made roller ball suspensions in my amp stands. The heavy toroidal power transformers can ring on the Raptor bottom panels when supported by the stock feet. My mounting scheme suppresses this ringing and improves the bass palpability.
          
          As far as I know, the Bang & Olufsen ICEpower amps are just a particular realization of what we call 'class D' amplifier topology. There are probably some differences among designs with regards to how the control circuitry and feedback are implemented, but I'm not educated in the details of this stuff.
          
          

          ---
        • RE: I had "assumed" that ICE would stand for something exotic. "Internal - muralman1 17:59:09 03/28/08 (0)
          In Reply to: RE: I had "assumed" that ICE would stand for something exotic. "Internal posted by Duilawyer on March 28, 2008 at 17:07:14

          I have found a great class D amp will sound like it's source, more than anything else. People have been astonished at the comparative digital sounds between over sampler units and non. The revelation is not subtle.
          
          

          ---
    • not obsolete for sure. I ain't turning down any Mc 402. - Duilawyer 13:13:35 03/28/08 (0)
      In Reply to: RE: pardon my ignorance posted by wazoo on March 28, 2008 at 05:30:42

      They sound different enough that many would like them better. I believe they are Beta, which in fact had better picture; the ICE format, or other digital switching amps, are VHS.
      
      

      ---
    • RE: pardon my ignorance - Dawnrazor 08:34:04 03/28/08 (0)
      In Reply to: RE: pardon my ignorance posted by wazoo on March 28, 2008 at 05:30:42

      Hey Waz,
      
      You are correct that class D is also solidstate. I suppose a better comparison would have to do with the different classes you mention.
      
      Another aspect is the status of the signal chain. In some systems it is possible to have a fully digital signal chain. I could see that this might be an advantage, but I bet few people have such a system. One day that might be the only way to do things.
      
      Funny you mention the Pass. I have been struggling with what to do with that thing. It is a fantastic amp. I have no problems with its sound quality. But it runs hot and draws a ton of power even at idle. Wanting to biamp, I find myself in a quandary. See I COULD get the 5 channel pass amp the X5 to match my current amp. Then I could biamp and run dual subs. I am sure it would sound great, but the heat and power issues would be increased. I could just suck it up and deal with that.
      
      I was looking at one of the Cary digital amps. I could buy 3 of these for the price of the 5 channel Pass.
      
      But I am afraid that if I move to a digital amp that the sound quality just wont be there. Also, if I were to go that route, it would make more sense to get one that accepts a digital signal and get a new sound card that outputs 6 channels of digital and still use the PC as a crossover.
      
      What to do Waz, what to do.
      
      

      ---
  • RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps - Carl G 00:08:36 03/28/08 (4)
    In Reply to: RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps posted by Dawnrazor on March 27, 2008 at 21:19:47

    Dui
    What is the system in use now that seems to make a difference.What amps and xover.
    What are you using for Bass vs Mid/Tweet.
    
    One comment, you evidently are still using conventional Xover for the mid/tweet, why have you not considered triamping and getting rid of the caps etc.
    Based on others experience here, there are additional veils to be peeled away by eliminating the stock xover.
    
    What are you using for speaker cables from your amps and cables from the active xover to the amps?
    Thanks
    
    

    ---

    • Spectron Musician amp - Duilawyer 13:24:49 03/28/08 (3)
      In Reply to: RE: Spectron-last post before going to amps posted by Carl G on March 28, 2008 at 00:08:36

      A II revamped to a III, not the SE, Bryston 10b, but I will replace it with a DCX2496 for XLR ins and outs, and a BK REF 4420 powering the bass panels. The BK still has double the volume of the Spectron, despite having half the wattage.
      
      

      ---

      • RE: Spectron Musician amp - Wasteh202 15:32:47 03/28/08 (2)
        In Reply to: RE: Spectron Musician amp posted by Duilawyer on March 28, 2008 at 13:24:49

        If that is true, the current delivery could be the reason... no ?
        
        
        

        ---

        • RE: Spectron Musician amp - Dawnrazor 15:57:44 03/28/08 (1)
          In Reply to: RE: Spectron Musician amp posted by Wasteh202 on March 28, 2008 at 15:32:47

          Or it could just be the gain structure of the amp.
          
          
          
          

          ---

          • yes, indeed - wazoo 06:04:27 03/29/08 (0)
            In Reply to: RE: Spectron Musician amp posted by Dawnrazor on March 28, 2008 at 15:57:44

            That's part of the synergistic relationship of a properly matched pre and amp - perhaps if his pre could deliver a taller waveform, the B&K would hit the wall while the Spectron kept on crankin'! Then again, what do I know?
            
            

            
            "Jazz is not dead - it just smells funny" FZ ♬
            
            

            ---

Post a Followup:

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Kimber Kable

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---